14 August 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Khan and Mueen Uddin PW 12

Today Tribunal 2 recorded the testimony of Prosecution witness 12, Mr Anirban Mostafa, the son of martyred journalist ANM Golam Mostafa. The witness testified regarding Charge 3. The Prosecution asserted that his testimony corroborates that of his uncle ANM Golam Rahman Dulu, who testified as Prosecution witness 8 on 31 July 2013.

Chief Prosecutor vs. Khan and Mueen UddinThe witness testified that he is the son of victim ANM Golam Mostafa ,who was killed in the massacre of Bangladesh’s intellectual community on 15 December 1971. He stated that he was only a few months old in 1971. He learned about his father’s abduction from his mother, his uncles, and newspaper reports.

The witness stated that his father, ANM Mostafa, worked for the Daily Purbadesh as a senior journalist and was affiliated with left wing politics. He wrote various articles that were pro-independence and were critical about the Pakistani government. The witness stated that this was the reason for which he was targeted.

On 11th December, 1971 at about 6 am the victim was holding the witness (then an infant) when the perpetrators came to their house in Gopibagh and took the victim away. The witness stated that his uncle ANM Golam Rahman Dulu went to the office of the Daily Purbadesh to look for Golam Mostafa but was unable to find any information. The witness then reiterated the description previously given by Prosecution witness 8 before the tribunal. The witness additionally stated he had seen and read various newspaper reports from the time, including the Daily Purbadesh’s 29 December 1971 issue and a few more from January, 1972. He said that from these newspapers he learned that Mueen Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman were the key persons behind the abduction of his father and other intellectuals.

Stating that the perpetrators deprived him of any chance to use the word “Baba” (Dad), the witness prayed for the highest punishment for those who are responsible for his father’s killing.

Following the examination-in-chief, the two state appointed Defense lawyers for Mueen Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman also conducted a brief cross-examination, alleging that the witness was only a newborn at the material time and is alleging the involvement of the accused based only on unfounded assumptions.